Quote:
Originally Posted by ken.3038
This is the first year we used pneumatic system on our robot. The inspector would not pass our bot unless we could prove the FESTO and PARKER solenoid valves had a cv of .32 or less. We had to search on line to find the data sheets only to discover that all data was in metric. We then had to figure out the conversion because metric was not acceptable to the inspector. Luckily the spare parts at pit admin. had 2 we could borrow. Even then the inspector wanted the data sheet but the head inspector said if it came from spare parts it must be legal. After all that we lost the valuable time replacing the solenoid valves and didn't get a chance to get on the practice field. Has any one had issues like this? Even the pistons were questioned. If it is this much hassle with having pneumatic on a robot I'm not sure about next year. By the way we were not the only team scrambling to figure out the cv rating.
|
This sort of thing is not pneumatic system specific.
I've run into inspectors that seem to "hold a grudge" many times and send heavy questioning on every single aspect of the robot. I've had a slew of these similar tedious requests made of our team while in inspection.
There are two things that we do to help us avoid situations like this:
1. Go through the inspection checklist with strict scrutiny before we bag the bot
2. Have the BoM, rules and a team of people who's collective knowledge adds up to everything on the bot on stand-by during the inspection. As well as documentation on anything that isn't common in FIRST (valves, linear actuators, sensors, servos, non-bimba cylinders, ect.).
If all else fails, ask politely for a different inspector or the lead robot inspector. The latter usually works a lot better.